Talk:Satsu (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)

Peer review

Satsu (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)

I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to bring it through the WP:FAC process in the future, but before doing that, I would like to get additional feedback to make that it is as prepared as possible. Thank you in advance for any comments as I really do appreciate the help. Aoba47 (talk) 16:35, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Comments by PanagiotisZois

Great work on the article! I'll go through the whole thing later, but one suggestion I wanted to make now is to recommend that you switch around the order of the "Reception" and "Themes and analysis" sections. It is an arbitrary and subjective observation, and Wikipedia's manual of style regarding fictional characters doesn't state that there has to be an order regarding something like this; though I did check, and the MofS regarding films does stipulate a given order. However, if one looks at the only two comic book character articles that have achieved featured status—Iron Man and Black Widow—both of them have the "Themes and motifs" section coming first, and then the "Reception" one.

Also, I have to say that I kinda preferred the previous image of Satsu which was from the cover of "Swell". However, this 100% based on personal taste, so if you prefer this particular image, I have no problem.--PanagiotisZois (talk) 17:00, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

@PanagiotisZois: Thank you for the kind words and for the comments. I have flipped the order of the two sections per your suggestion. I also prefer the "Swell" cover, but I replaced it for two reasons. I thought it would be better to use Georges Jeanty's art since he is the primary artist for the character. I was also concerned that using image with a second character, in this case Kennedy, could potentially confuse readers.

I could use a more cropped version of the cover, as done on the Buffy wiki, to avoid that potential confusion. Unfortunately, Satsu never hade her own dedicated cover art, as the variant cover for "Swell" is just about Buffy. I could use a cropped version of this image from the "The Long Way Home" arc. I am likely just over-thinking all of this though. The original cover may be the preferable option, but I wanted to get your opinion on it before making any changes. Just to be clear, I would be more than happy to revert the image back, and I think that I am leaning more toward the cropped version of the cover. Aoba47 (talk) 18:59, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

@Aoba47: Yeah, the fact Satsu doesn't have her own dedicated cover is an unfortunate pickle. I do agree with the idea of using a cropped version of the cover. Though that brings up another question. Should the crop be as focused as it is on the Buffy Wiki, or display Satsu's entire body, but simply omit Kennedy? I'll leave that up to you. PanagiotisZois (talk) 20:08, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

@PanagiotisZois: Thank you for the response. I have attempted a cropped version that displays Satsu's full body. I do not think there is a way to do so while also cropping out Kennedy as they overlap each other, but hopefully, the new version is okay. I am more than happy to take on suggestions or different ideas. Aoba47 (talk) 21:04, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Hey @Aoba47:. Sorry it took me a couple of days. Work can be a bit exhausting at times. Anyway, here are my comments for the first half of the main body. I skipped the lede as I found I prefer leaving it last for my reviews; as ledes are a summary of the main body, it's best to look into that first. Also, so it doesn't seem to daunting for you or me, focusing only on half of the article for now and continuing my review once all my comments here have been addressed seems to be the best approach.--PanagiotisZois (talk) 12:54, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

@PanagiotisZois: There is no need to apologize. There is absolutely no rush with this, and I am just grateful for your help. Take as much time as you need, and do not feel like you have to do this right away or anything. Apologies in advance as the lede is admittedly not great, but I agree that it is best to review at the end. I have left my comments below, and have addressed them in the articles. Thank you for pointing out some of my silly mistakes and areas where the storyline was not clear. Please let me know if any of responses are unclear or if these parts of the article could be further improved. I hope you are having a great weekend so far! Aoba47 (talk) 16:47, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Resolved comments from PanagiotisZois

Appearances I'll admit, I'm not 100% about having that first paragraph present in the section that essentially acts "Fictional biography", but it's not something I have much of an issue with either. Also, the Iron Man article does present Tony's origins with a mixture of in-universe and real-world details in the first paragraph of the "Fictional character biography" sections, so there is some precedent for that. That is fair. I am likely just way over-thinking it. I thought that providing some background would be helpful for readers who are unfamiliar with Buffy as a series or as a concept in general. I would be open to either removing it altogether or modifying this information. It may be better to start off this section directly about Satsu. For instance, I did not have to provide this kind of background about Star Trek for the Kes (Star Trek) article. I was just concerned about readers being confused about what a Slayer is or how Satsu became one in the first place. Aoba47 (talk) 16:47, 12 April 2025 (UTC) That makes sense. As I said before, I wasn't opposed to its inclusion. Just wasn't fully sure if it needed to be there. But you're right about it helping provide context. PanagiotisZois (talk) 09:21, 13 April 2025 (UTC) "with only one usually". Small thing, but I'd recommend "usually" coming before "only one". Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 14:19, 12 April 2025 (UTC) As the sentence is a bit long, it's best to have "but Buffy changes" be the start of a new one, having the previous end with a full stop. Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 14:19, 12 April 2025 (UTC) "having witch". Probably better to clarify that Willow isn't just a random witch but also Buffy's (best) friend. Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 14:19, 12 April 2025 (UTC) "disagreed" to "disapproved" sounds more accurate. Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 14:19, 12 April 2025 (UTC) Sidenote. While Satsu is ethnically Japanese, do the comics clarify if she was raised in Japan? Because it does seem kind of strange that she would be stationed in Scotland, unless she was already living there. Or did she get activated, got recruited, and then was stationed in Scotland? Not really something that needs an explanation in the article, but I was curious. Thank you for asking this and for catching this. The comics do not really delve into the character's backstory. We know that her parents were disappointed in her being a lesbian and had bought her a furisode and that she presumably received her powers while she was in school. For some reason, I conflated the furisode part with confirming that she was born/raised in Japan, which is not true. We do not know how Satsu got to the Scotland base, as she was part of the squad at the start of the comics. My best guess is that either Buffy or someone involved with her found Satsu and brought her to Scotland to be trained. As to why Scotland, I think the comics were trying to add a more international flavor and wanted to have Buffy based out of a Scottish castle. Aoba47 (talk) 16:47, 12 April 2025 (UTC) "Buffy warns Satsu". I haven't read the comics in about 10+ years. Would it be more accurate to say that Buffy warns Satsu against pursuing a relationship with her? Agreed. That would be better. Revised Aoba47 (talk) 14:34, 12 April 2025 (UTC) "The two have sex"; so much for the above. But I'll admit, given the end of the previous paragraph, having this one begin as such feels abrupt. Did Buffy warn Satsu not to fall for her, and they had sex at a later point, or did they have sex immediately after Buffy warned Satsu about her exes dying? It was rather abrupt in the comics as well. It goes from Buffy warning Satsu in "A Beautiful Sunset" right to them having sex in the very next issue with, "Wolves at the Gate". They did not have sex the same night (as Satsu was put into the hospital following a fight with Twilight) so I tried to clarify that it was at some later time. Aoba47 (talk) 14:34, 12 April 2025 (UTC) "from Slayer Kennedy". Would it be better to say "from fellow Slayer Kennedy"? Agreed. Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 14:34, 12 April 2025 (UTC) "The demon possesses Satsu". Which demon? The demonic stuffed animals are brought up, but it doesn't explain if there's a single demon creating them or if it's something else. Apologies for not being clear in this part. The stuffed animals (Vampy Cats) were being used a certain species of demons (the Swell) to posses other people. The Vampy Cats pop up in later issues of the comics as a regular toy. I have tried to clear this up, but let me know if further revisions are necessary. Aoba47 (talk) 14:53, 12 April 2025 (UTC) Also, does the demon fully take over Satsu or does it merely influence her personality in a negative manner? In the former case, I'd say that "making her wear a furisode..." seems more appropriate; but maybe I'm overthinking things. The demon fully takes over Satsu as after Kennedy saves her, Satsu is shown as being unaware of anything that happened during her possession. Aoba47 (talk) 14:53, 12 April 2025 (UTC) "Vampy Cats, with". Comma isn't necessary. I ended up changing this part. Aoba47 (talk) 14:53, 12 April 2025 (UTC) "Buffy advises Satsu". Does this happen immediately after the Vampy Cats incident? Also, does Buffy go to Japan to talk to Satsu, or is it over the phone? Buffy talks to Satsu over video call, which I believe shows the growing distance between the two. I do not think that it was the same night as Buffy comments on other shipments of Vampy Cats being destroyed, as well as the main factory, and these actions are discussed by Harmony Kendall during a Larry King Live interview so I think that at least some time has passed. Please let me know if further clarification is needed. Aoba47 (talk) 15:33, 12 April 2025 (UTC) "ant-Slayer". Not the ants! XD I wonder if this would be a good name for a pest control company lol. Aoba47 (talk) 15:33, 12 April 2025 (UTC) "Satsu agrees, throwing out her cinnamon lip gloss in favor of finding a 'new flavor'". Love a queen that knows her worth and realizes she deserves better. Agreed. Satsu had a good arc in this season. I am glad that they took the time to tie it up. Even though I wish they did more with the character, this moment in particular was a nice ending for her (at least for her major storylines and focus). Aoba47 (talk) 15:33, 12 April 2025 (UTC) Do you think it's important to note that Twilight is actually Angel? Admittedly, it doesn't seem like something important to Satsu's character, but I wanted to bring that up. I was on the fence about this. I tried to keep this section as concise as possible. For instance, I did not include Satsu's minor appearances in other issues, like in "The Chain". Satsu does have some interactions with Twilight, as she fought him (and lost) in "A Beautiful Sunset" and saw him and Buffy having sex in "Twilight", but he is not really involved with her or her arc specifically. Let me know what you think though as I am open to changing or adding anything. Aoba47 (talk) 15:33, 12 April 2025 (UTC) Hmmm... Well, you clearly have more knowledge of the comics than I do. I don't think we need info about Satsu's appearance in "The Chain" or her fighting Twilight in "A Beautiful Sunset". But I'm thinking that some information on Satsu in the "Twilight" and "Last Gleaming" story arcs could be beneficial. Maybe that during the battle between Buffy's Slayer organization and Twilight's army, it's revealed that Twilight is Angel, and Satsu witnesses them having sex? PanagiotisZois (talk) 15:50, 12 April 2025 (UTC) That makes sense. Apologies for doing so many edits and replies. You can tell that I am a bit out of practice ><. In the future, both for this review and for others, I will make sure to do my replies in a single edit to avoid any edit conflicts and to just make everything clearer. I have added further information from "Twilight" and "Lasting Gleaming", but let me know if this could use more work. Aoba47 (talk) 17:28, 12 April 2025 (UTC) "out of practice". Not at all! And don't worry about the multiple edits. We all have different approaches. I guess part of me is inclined to ask "how do Buffy and Angel birth a sentient dimension?", but I feel like that isn't all that necessary to include in Satsu's article. And besides, I think it's clear to the reader that Buffy is a fantasy/supernatural series, so the answer would just be "because magic". PanagiotisZois (talk) 09:25, 13 April 2025 (UTC) Thank you for the kind words. The dimension part is rather vague. Buffy and Angel have sex and then they appear in the new dimension so it skips right over any type of birthing process. I agree that the "because magic" part is the best way to view it and it is not necessary for this article, but I still wanted to provide some further background. The whole Twilight storyline can get quite convoluted real fast. Aoba47 (talk) 13:23, 13 April 2025 (UTC) "Following this change". What change? I was trying to tie into the loss of magic referenced in the previous sentence, but it is admittedly confusing and unnecessary since Satsu reappears after magic is brought back anyway. Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 15:33, 12 April 2025 (UTC) Creation and design "After Buffy the Vampire Slayer ended". The show is already linked in the previous section. Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 15:37, 12 April 2025 (UTC) "and he said that she". The "he" isn't necessary. Removed. Aoba47 (talk) 15:37, 12 April 2025 (UTC) "Buffy Summers was". As Buffy is introduced by her full name in the "Appearances" section by her full name, linked to her article, I don't believe we need to do so again here. Revised. I think this kind of thing makes it obvious that I wrote this section before the "Appearances" section. Aoba47 (talk) 15:37, 12 April 2025 (UTC) "inspired Jeanty to draw Buffy". Given the context of the sentence here, I think you can replace "Buffy" with "her" as it will be clear who you're talking about; and to avoid repetiion. Agreed. Removed. Aoba47 (talk) 15:37, 12 April 2025 (UTC) Relationship with Buffy There's actually something I'm curious about. If I remember correctly, Satsu having feelings for Buffy and kissing her to break the curse happened in the first story act ("The Long Way Home") right? And them sleeping together didn't happen until the third arc, "Wolves at the Gate"? When Whedon created Satsu, did he always intend for her and Buffy to sleep together, or did her just have Satsu have a crush on Buffy and then decided "Hey, you know what? These two should have sex."? Admittedly, the first two sentences make it seem like it was the latter, but that could simply be Whedon explaining that them having sex made sense given their characterization at the start of the comic and how he didn't want for the relationship to take to long to happen; which explains why it happens relatively early in the third arc, rather than later. I believe it was the latter, which is supported in these two interviews (here and here) However, Jeanty was aware that the two characters would have sex from the start. What I think happened was that Whedon plotted at least the first few story arcs with other writers and that this component had developed along the way, so by the time Jeanty joined, it was already a part of the story, but that is just my speculation. Aoba47 (talk) 16:38, 12 April 2025 (UTC) Ah... OK, I see. Thanks. :) PanagiotisZois (talk) 09:30, 13 April 2025 (UTC) "Buffy as lonely". I'm guessing it's "was lonely". Unless you want to remove "that". I removed the "that" as I believe that was what I was going for, but let me know if the other way is preferrable. Aoba47 (talk) 16:38, 12 April 2025 (UTC) "explaining: "And the way Joss experiences the world, this happens with people." Might be better to rewrite this a little, as all three paragraphs in this section end the same way. With a semicolon being followed by a quotation. In Sarah Michelle Gellar's case, I'll admit her comment is kinda funny and small enough to not be an issue. As for Joss Whedon's comment at the very end, it's somewhat complicated, so leaving his words as is would be more appropriate. But here, you can slightly rewrite it. Maybe something like "explaining that 'the way Joss experiences...". That makes sense. Best to avoid repetition whenever possible. I have used your suggestion. Let me know if you think I should paraphrase this part. I thought it was a helpful quote about Whedon's perception about experimentation as it might connect with the later critism of this being out-of-character for Buffy. Aoba47 (talk) 16:38, 12 April 2025 (UTC) "Although Jeanty was uncertain about this approach". What is "this approach" referring to? Buffy having sex with a woman and experimenting in general being out-of-character, or having her continue to identify as straight instead of her being written as bisexual? He was uncertain about Buffy having sex with a woman and experimenting in general. I have attempted to clarify this. Aoba47 (talk) 16:38, 12 April 2025 (UTC) Is having "not because of their genders" necessary? I get the point Allie and you are trying to make. Maybe it'd be better as "and considered her relationship with Satsu as inappropriate, not because of their genders, but due to their roles as general and soldier"? Agreed. I was trying to hit this point too hard. Removed. Aoba47 (talk) 16:38, 12 April 2025 (UTC) Stupid question, but if "Wolves at the Gate" was written by Drew Goddard, why is so much attention afforded to Joss Whedon's comments on the storyline and Satsu? Is it because he was (I'm assuming) the editor of Season Eight and storylines probably passed through him? Or alternatively, he may have conceived the storyline, but Goddard was the one to actually write it? I'll admit, I'm not an expert on how comic book publishing works. That is not a stupid question. Just to be clear, I am by no means a comic book expert. Whedon and Goddard collaborated on the sexual component of the Satsu/Buffy relationship, as as noted in these interviews (here and here). Despite this, I could only find one interview with Goddard, while most of the coverage focuses on Whedon. He is the one that talks to The New York Times and ABC News after the first issue of "Wolves at the Gate" is released. Whedon likely did most of the publicity not only because of his status of the "executive producer" of the comic, but also because he was more recognizable and had a dedicated following from the television show. Even the scholarly analysis focuses more on Whedon's quotes about the storyline. It is a shame as I would loved to hear more from Goddard about his contributions as he did write this part of the storyline, but Whedon is given more attention in the article because that is how the coverage went (both at the time of publication and afterward). Aoba47 (talk) 16:38, 12 April 2025 (UTC) "Whedon said that after 'Wolves at the Gate'". Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 16:38, 12 April 2025 (UTC) "continued the "bury your gays" trope". Would it be better to say "contributed to the "bury your gays" trope"? Agreed. Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 16:38, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

OK, here are my comments for the second half of the main body. Unfortunately, I'm going to be a stick in the mud here. :/ There are certain parts of these sections that don't stick right to me, primarily because they seem to be less about discussing Satsu, and more about discussing Buffy. Understandable, as Buffy is the title character of the show/comic, and most of the attention afforded to Satsu is directly because of her connection to Buffy. Still, as this article is about Satsu and not something like Stucky or Superman and Lois Lane that focuses on a given pairing, or an article one either Season Eight/"Wolves at the Gate", some of these sections don't seem like they fit here. Still, I'm just one person, so take some of my criticisms with a grain of salt. It would be best if a few other users also commented on the situation, before you take drastic measures like outright removing anything.--PanagiotisZois (talk) 11:49, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

@PanagiotisZois: I would not say you are being a stick in the mud. I appreciate your feedback and your honesty. That should be the primary purpose and goal of a peer review. As I have said below, I can understand and agree with your criticism. My main concern when coming back to the article and while rewriting it was focusing too much on Buffy when it should be about Satsu. I agree that several spots are more suited for the Buffy Summers or "Wolves at the Gate" articles. I have no issue with changing things, as previous drafts are saved in the edit histories for this article and for the sandbox. I have addressed your points about the "Themes and analysis" section, and I will get to the "Reception" section later today. Apologies for that. I just want to take a short break. Please let me know if there are any issues with my responses so far. Aoba47 (talk) 19:53, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

No need to apologize. And thank you for being receptive to my comments! >< I can understand it can be somewhat demoralizing or even make you a bit sad to have put so much work into researching and writing something only to have to cut it out per someone else's suggestion. Heck, I remember feeling kinda strange when I ended up removing an entire topic of discussion from my thesis that was like, 1000 words; lol. I hope I didn't hurt your feelings with all this. Your work on the article is VERY good. It's just as you pointed out, that some things would work better on other articles.

And no need to apologize for taking a break. Once you are done with the main body, I'll go through over everything again one more time-I'm sure it will be great :D-and then I'll read the lede. PanagiotisZois (talk) 20:18, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

@PanagiotisZois: I try to look at the positives in this kind of situation. It doesn't always work, but I try my best. In the past, I think that I would have felt more demoralized, but I genuinely enjoyed reading through all of the coverage. It reminded me a bit of reading articles when I was in graduate school, which is kind of surreal to think about. It was also fun to go back through the Season Eight comics again. Although I have a more mixed opinion of them, I did really enjoy a lot of it, and I should go back and re-read them again. I fell off with Buffy comics in Season Nine, but that is a separate story. So no worries. You did not hurt my feelings at all. I have been in similar situations like yours with the thesis. It is certainly an experience lol. Thank you again for the help and for the kind words. Let me know if I missed anything or if something did not get saved in the main article. I will probably take a small break from Wikipedia tomorrow as I always get a bit anxious whenever one of my FAs is the TFA (although I am still always honored by it of course). Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for all your hard work on this article. It was VERY fun to read, and actually makes me think I should restart Buffy or reread Season Eight; in English, this time. The depiction of Satsu and lesbianism in Season Eight is also a very fun subject, from an academic point-of-view. Makes me wonder if I personally would ever want to write a small article on the subject, lol. And congrats on having another featured article appear on the main page! PanagiotisZois (talk) 09:22, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

I am glad that you enjoyed the article, and I hope that you enjoy the comics if you ever get the chance to go back to them. It is nice to go back and be able to read through it all at once or at your own pace. I find that it helps to appreciate them, warts and all. I would be interested in what you would write about the subject. I have mostly read and studied how gay men are represented in media, but I would love to learn more about lesbian representation, particularly in the comics. I know that there is Kate Kane (Batwoman). I have also read some interesting analysis on how the Buffy comics represent lesbians with Willow and Kennedy. For as much as I dislike that the comics did not develop on their original characters, I actually find myself enjoy Kennedy a lot more than I expected in Season Eight. Aoba47 (talk) 00:54, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

More resolved comments from PanagiotisZois

Sexuality "Wolves at the Gate" is already linked earlier in the article. So is Joss Whedon. Removed. Aoba47 (talk) 19:53, 14 April 2025 (UTC) I hope I don't come off as cynical when I say this, but something I've noticed is that the first two paragraphs of this section are almost soley about Buffy, not Satsu. Only at the end of the second paragraph do we see a comment about Satsu, and how her having sex wiht Buffy a second time is indicative of her agency. I guess you can argue that this discussion relates to Satsu as her having sex with Buffy led to the discussion on Buffy's sexual orientation. But that is more about focusing on Buffy continuing to identify as straight, rather than a discussion of Satsu as a lesbian character (in comics). I would not say you are being cynical. You bring up a fair point. I actually had similar concerns while putting this together in my sandbox, but I wanted to get another perspective on it. I agree that things like the heteroflexibility are best suited for both the Buffy Summers article as her relationships have unsurprisingly gotten a lot of attention and the "Wolves at the Gate" article. Most of the discussion is focused on Buffy as she is the main character rather than Satsu, who takes on a more supporting role. I have revised the "Sexuality" subsection to focus more on the analysis regarding the power imbalance in the relationship as I think that does have more to do with Satsu as the discussion focuses more on the character and her agency. Let me know what you think. I will double-check the sources to see if I can find anything else. Aoba47 (talk) 19:53, 14 April 2025 (UTC) The last two sentences of paragraph 2 being part of the article is something I 100% agree with being here. Even the previous ones by Lewis Call help add context. But I'm just not sure about the inclusion of the previous ones, particularly the entirety of paragraph 1; at least paragraph 2 focuses on how the comics handled the Buffy/Satsu pairing, how it was "dismissed", and what other lesbian characters thought of it. Still, I'm not saying that them being here is 100% wrong either. I guess this is something where you'll have to wait and see what other users have to say. I ended up removing these parts as I agree that they are not specifically about Satsu. Aoba47 (talk) 19:53, 14 April 2025 (UTC) "Willow Rosenberg and Kennedy" are both linked, which has already happened. Also, Willow was introduced earlier, so we don't need her full name again. Removed. Aoba47 (talk) 19:53, 14 April 2025 (UTC) Regarding Paragraph 3, I don't know why, but I think switching the order regarding Liddell and Burnett's statements would make more sense. I agree. I have swapped the two. Aoba47 (talk) 19:53, 14 April 2025 (UTC) Race and ethnicity Do mean mean "scholarly analyses"? Yes. That was a rather silly typo on my part as this section is obviously not just about one analysis. Aoba47 (talk) 19:53, 14 April 2025 (UTC) "downplaying it". I'm assuming "it" refers to her being Japanese. In that case, it might be better to replace the word with "heritage" or "culture/cultural background". I have used "heritage" because it is more concise, but I am more than open to other options. Aoba47 (talk) 19:53, 14 April 2025 (UTC) "either the "gentle geisha" or the Dragon Lady". Shouldn't Dragon Lady also be in quotation marks? Though I might be wrong on that. Also, shouldn't it be more accurate to use the indefinite article "a Dragon Lady" rather than the definite one? I do not believe that Dragon Lady needs quotation marks as it is a known and often-discussed trope, while I have personally not seen the "gentle Geisha" phrase used in this way before so I quoted it as that seems more unique or specific to the author. I have of course seen Geisha being used as a stereotype or trope, but I am unfamiliar with the "gentle" part. I have mostly seen these kinds of tropes discussed with a definite article rather than an indefinite one, but that could just be my personal experience. Aoba47 (talk) 19:53, 14 April 2025 (UTC) I'm not sure if "gentle Geisha" is a commonly-used trope or if it's even referred to as such, so it's a good idea to use quotation marks here. As for Dragon Lady, I don't have an issue with it appearing as is without quotations marks; or the use of indefinite articles. All good. PanagiotisZois (talk) 20:11, 14 April 2025 (UTC) "For Hautsch". I think changing that to "According to her" is better, as you avoid repeating Hautsch's name in close proximity with the previous occurrence. Also, while using "for" is not grammatically wrong at all, it kinda sounds wrong, doesn't it? Agreed. Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 19:53, 14 April 2025 (UTC) Furisode is already linked earlier. The trials and tribulations of writing the "Appearances" section last. XD That and I did not really check over the article as a whole after putting each section together >< Aoba47 (talk) 19:53, 14 April 2025 (UTC) It's okay. XD You did take a bottom-up approach (somewhat) and also changed the last two major sections per my suggestion, so it's understandable for things like this to happen. PanagiotisZois (talk) 20:12, 14 April 2025 (UTC) I think that Paragraph 3 would work better as the first one. It discusses Satsu's ethnicity by acknowledging that it's a subject often overlooked by her sexuality, and then goes into the other two paragraphs, which discuss solely her ethnicity without reference to the Buffy/Satsu pairing. Of course, one might argue that this is the point; having the first two paragraphs discuss only Satsu's ethnicity and then about how it relates to her relationship with Buffy. I'll leave this up to you to decide. Agreed. I actually had it structured this way in my notes, but for whatever reason, I did not follow through with it that way. Aoba47 (talk) 19:53, 14 April 2025 (UTC) "According to Frohard-Dourlent [...] characters's sexual relationship". Somewhat long sentence with "or" being repeated a few times without pause, which can be confusing. Unless I'm mistaken, "its" is referring to her ethnicity, correct? Maybe clarify that with "her ethnicity's connection". Revised. Let me know if this would benefit from further revision. Aoba47 (talk) 19:53, 14 April 2025 (UTC) As for "characters's", you don't need the second "s". Wouldn't it be simpler to just say "their"? Changed. I always trip up on this for whatever reason. I agree that "their" is better and avoid the issue altogether. Aoba47 (talk) 19:53, 14 April 2025 (UTC) Reception OK, so the first paragraph seems focused in that it's only about fan response to the pairing. Pretty good and focused. Unlink "Wolves at the Gate". Unlinked. Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC) Allie was already introduced earlier. Removed. Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC) "Joss Whedon did an interview with The New York Times [...] to address potential reactions". I don't think this sentence adds much to the paragraph. I mean, what are some of the potential reactions that Whedon thought fans would have? As it stands now, this sentence doesn't link much to the rest of the paragraph, which is about how fans reacted to the Buffy/Satsu storyline. Removed. I originally thought that it was beneficial to include that Whedon was aware of the potential backlash and criticism with the storyline, but that would be more appropriate for the "Wolves at the Gate" article. Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC) "in one of the issues". Does the source state which one? Probably not that important, but if the source does state which, I don't see why we can't include it. Thank you for bringing this up, as the source actually did say the issue number. I just used the issue number in the article, as I did not think the title was necessary, but let me know if you think otherwise. In case you are curious, the issue was one about Faith. Your comment also lead me to find something else in a separate source It is a bit crazy to think that a storyline from issue #12 was getting responses from issue #24 to issue #29. Some of those letters are rough to read, and unfortunately, feel quite similar to the current outrage culture online. Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC) I really appreciate the clarification concerning the issue numbers. Using the titles isn't necessary, especially as it would just bloat the sentence. I didn't get into Buffy until about 2010 or something, but it seems that it was huge during the 2000s, so I guess it's not that surprising that people were still talking about Buffy having sex with a woman more than a year after it happened. Oh, God. Can you imagine the amount of YouTube channels dedicate to making hate/ragebait videos that would be making one video after the other about Buffy/Satsu if these comics had come out today, instead of 2007? Fox News would be ALL over this. Heck, I'm surprised they didn't have anything to say back then; they sure had lots to say about Mass Effect. But I understand what you mean. It's sad that after so much progress had been achieved until about 2016, things nowadays in America, culturally, are somehow worse than they were 20 years ago. PanagiotisZois (talk) 09:14, 15 April 2025 (UTC) "representative of the United States". Added. Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC) Do you think changing "this range in reactions" to "the range of reactions" would be better? Agreed. Changed. Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC) "clarified that it". "It" referring to the range in reactions, right? Did Allie mean that in a general sense, or specifically about the letters column? I ended up changing this part a bit. I believe that he meant in the general sense as he discussed different places online where he saw fan reactions. Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC) Season Eight is linked earlier. Unlinked. Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC) "In Nerdist" to "Nerdist's" I prefer the current wording if that is okay as I feel that it adds some sentence variety as this kind of section can become very repetitive very quickly. Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC) Paragraph 2 focuses on the relationship with Buffy and Satsu, and how critics responded to it, while the third focuses more on what this meant for Buffy's sexuality. One things that kinda worries me is how much of the commentary is actually about Satsu. For example, the comment by Digital Spy's David Opie isn't even about Satsu but about Buffy. Admittedly, other than that, I don't have anything else from Paragraph 2 that immediately sticks out. That is understandable. I have replaced the Opie quote. The new quote is still more about the relationship in general, but I think it is a step up from the Opie one, which was all about Buffy. Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC) However, there is something I'm curious about. The start of the paragraph states that "Buffy's relationship with Satsu was praised by critics", and you have a note highlighting sources stating this. Given that many of these sources are academic, I wanted to ask, did the authors of these papers/reviews actually state themselves that "critics enjoyed the pairing" or are you synthesizing the sources here? In the latter case, there's obviously nothing wrong with that! I'm just curious. The main reason I'm pointing this out is that while the paragraph starts by arguing that critics praised the Buffy/Satsu ship, in the middle of the paragraph you state that "Reviewers expressed varied reactions to Buffy having sex with Satsu". Does this mean that althought their relationship as a whole was mostly praised by critics, them having sex is something that drew a mixed response? Because the way it stands, this sentence somewhat contradicts your first one. I ended up changing this paragraph a lot. My intention was that some critics praised how Satsu's storyline with Buffy was developed from "Long Way Home" to "Wolves at the Gate". I thought that was separate from the reviews that focused exclusively on the sexual aspects. I have tried to better reflect that in the prose, but let me know what you think. Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC) Paragraph 4 seems to focus on how Season Eight depict lesbians, with Satsu being one of the prime examples. One could argue that this and Paragraph 2 are the same in that the focus on Satsu, but through different lenses. One looking at her through her relationship with Buffy, the other looking at her as one of the comics' lesbian characters. Normally, I'd say that regarding things like "Reception" sections for characters, one should start by focusing on responses to the character first and then discussing things like relationships. However, given the fact that most of the focus on Satsu is due to her relationship with Buffy, I can understand why the section that focuses on her as a lesbian and not Buffy's one-night stand would go last. Yeah, a lot of the reviews do look at Satsu through the lens of other characters, whether it be through Buffy or through other lesbian characters. I think that is to be expected for a supporting character. I agree that I would ordinarily put the character-specific reviews first, but since Satsu is primarily known through her relationship with Buffy, I felt that it was best to start there. Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC) "questioned how Satsu and Kennedy could be the only lesbian Slayers in an army of thousands". Lol. I know, right? I remember there being a fun conversation about this online about whether or not the line from "Swell" really meant that Satsu and Kennedy were the only lesbian Slayers in Buffy's army. It is so silly. Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC) "Gomez felt" to "argued" seems better. Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC) "focused on this despite being several issues after". Since you're talking about Satsu's "sexual identity and relationship with Buffy", it should be plural. SOmething like "focused on these topics". I ended up revising this part. Gomez was more upset that Satsu was still hung on Buffy in "Swell". Let me know if the revision clears things up. If you ever get the chance, I found Gomez's article on Satsu's relationship with Buffy to be really interesting in that she is very clear in how it made her feel. It is one of those instances where you can really feel the disappointment through the words lol. Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC) Also, wouldn't it be "despite being set several issues"? Agreed. Added. Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC) I decided to leave Paragraph 3 as the last one. Maybe I'm not paying enough attention, but unlike the other three, these one seems less focused than the other paragraphs. That is fair. I think that I tried to string too many ideas together into one paragraph. I ended up removing most of this paragraph anyway as it is not really relevant to an article on Satsu. Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC) "Some critics contrasted Buffy's behavior [...] further attraction after this story arc" seems to be more about Buffy and less about Satsu. Agreed. Removed. Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC) Same goes for the next sentence; "Scholar Lisa Gomez [...] it was a 'phrase'". Granted, it does connect to the sentence right after—"Other commentators thought [...] paired Buffy with fellow Slayer Faith"—which acts as kind of a contrast to it and does focus on the Buffy/Satsu romance, so it works here. I also removed these parts as they would be better suited for the Buffy Summers article. The fan fiction part is not really about Satsu and is more about Buffy/Faith ship. Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC) Everything from "Buffy's actions toward Satsu were questioned..." to the end of the paragraph is quite interesting, but the last two sentence seems again to be mostly about Buffy, and less about Satsu. Or, to try and clarify what I mean, they focus on the Buffy/Satsu pairing through Buffy, instead of through Satsu; if that makes sense. I ended up moving one of these sources to the analysis section, as the first subsection developed to become more about the power dynamic. I think it works better there anyway. Aoba47 (talk) 05:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

OK. I'm collapsing my other comments as not only have you addressed all of them, but also heavily rewritten many sections. I will go over through the entirety of the main body again, and leave the lede for last.--PanagiotisZois (talk) 11:50, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your patience. I appreciate your help. Hopefully, the rewrites are helpful, but I would be more than happy to revise anything to hopefully make this article as good as possible. Aoba47 (talk) 00:54, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

The article is MUCH more focused on Satsu now than it was before, I have to say. It looks really good. :D I have gone over through the main body once more, and these are my remaining comments. Once those are addressed, I'll look through the lede, and then the article (in my opinion) will be ready for a FAC.--PanagiotisZois (talk) 09:53, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

• "make every women who could potentially be a Slayer into one, including Satsu". I didn't catch this at first, but is it possible for this sentence to prove confusing to readers? Season Eight is a comic book continuation of a television series. The way the sentence is structured, one might get the impression that Satsu's activation took place and was also shown in the series finale. I might be overthinking things, and the sentence is actually fine, but do you think the sentence should end at the comma, and then have the next one go like "As revealed in the comics, Satsu was one of the potential Slayers activated". Again, I might be overthinking it, so if you believe it's fine, leave it as is.
• "They discover a stuffed animal known as Vampy Cat, which possesses Satsu". If I remember correctly, Vampy Cat is possessed by a demon, right? Might be good to clarify this.
• "act misogynistic and homphobic". Since you're talking about what Satsu is doing, wouldn't you need to use the adverbial form of the word; "misogynistically"? Unless you'd like to slightly rewrite the sentences as "and behave in a misogynistic and homophobic manner".
  • I think the adverbial form of of "homophobic" would be "homophobically", but unlike "misogynistically" I don't think that a commonly-used word. And saying "act homophobic" does sound right.
• "they need to adapt". Does the comic rify what Buffy means? Adapt to their new environment or their strategies as Slayers?
• "The two of them have sex". Curious, does that happen in the middle of fighting between the Slayers and Twilight's forces? I've forgotten MANY things about Season Eight. Wasn't Angel possessed by Twilight or something?
• "as we possibly could". Since you're quoting Whedon's words in the sentence, and because of the structure of it, the "we" here needs to be replaced. Maybe with "they" or "the crew"?
• "Whedon clarified that Buffy was not coming out [...] not be discussed further in future issues". As with other instances, this seems solely about Buffy, and not much about Satsu. Admittedly, the following two sentences are also primarily about Buffy, but they pertain to her having sex with a woman, so the association with Satsu is there.
  • "While "Wolves at the Gate" was being published, media outlets reported that it was unusual for lead characters in comics to experiment sexually". Same issue as above. Unless the sources also treat Satsu as one of the leads of Season Eight; though in her case, she's not experimenting.
• "positions Buffy more as a villain". Compared to what? Previous seasons in the show? Or that Season Eight portrays her more so as a villain than a hero?
  • "Buffy is more focused on herself". Kinda the same boat as earlier. Something like "primarily focused on herself" would work better. Unless you want to say "on herself than others".
• "the comics make Satsu and the reader realize" is a somewhat odd sentence, as you're talking about both a fictional, in-universe and external, real-life realization. I'm guessing "comics" refers specifically to the storyline, and not Season Eight as a whole, correct?
• "Sociology scholar Hélène Frohard-Dourlent [...] establish the terms of their relationship" is a bit long. Also, is there supposed to be a full stop at "Slayers Frohard-Dourlent". I was a little confused if that was supposed to be the end of the sentence, establishing what traits show that "Buffy has more authority", and then talk about how this dynamic is shown through Buffy establishing the boundaries. Or if it's all one sentence and you mean that Buffy being leader of the Slayers is best shown in her establishing the boundaries.
• I think "and is the one who/that initiates their second encounter" would be better; though it may be unnecessary.
• Does Burnett clarify which sexual relationship Buffy tried to deepen? It's not necessary to add, though a note might be helpful.
• "majority of discussions" concerning what? I'm guessing it's "a majority of discussions concerning Satsu are about her relationship with Buffy".
• Given that the first paragraph in the "Race and ethnicity" subsection already discusses that Satsu's heritage received less attention than her sexuality, having the next paragraph begin with "Satsu's race and ethnicity were discussed in scholarly analyses" is a bit redundant; another issue with rearranging paragraphs, lol. I'd recomment removing it. Of course, that could cause another issue in having a paragraph consisting of just 2 lines. For this reason, I believe it's best to combine paragraphs 2 & 3, and you could slightly rewrite the opening sentence to say that "Some scholars that analysed Satsu's race and ethnicity are...".
• Can't explain it, but "Allie viewed the range of reactions as representative of the United States" seem more appropriate in getting the point across; that the range in responses fans had to the pairing was representative of Americans.